(Without quips --) basing an RPG off a CCG might be interesting!
*cough* Thronebreaker *cough*
*cough* Thronebreaker *cough*
That reminds me: apart of a game set in a steampunk-y world, I’d like them to do another game in The Witcher Tales series. I’m not fed up with Gwent (at least not yet ) so another one would be cool I’d say.
) so another one would be cool I’d say.
Last edited:
Guys CDPR has already announced they are not done with the Witcher Universe at this point. But Geralt's story is over for sure. (Thanks god, there is no point of using Geralt as MC after he finally found some peace.) Hereby i don't think they won't use Witcher 4 as a new game name. Because it will leave an impression that old characters are still involved. And i am pretty sure they will focus on new Witcher game after Cyberpunk release. Because Netflix TV show attract a lot of people's attention (even though it is horrible show in all ways.), now CDPR will try to use that popularity before it fades off. And considering Last Witcher Related content was Blood and Wine DLC in 2016 (Thronebreaker besides). I think it is time to create something new in Witcher Universe.
Honestly, while I'm all for seeing more from the Witcher universe...I would be more interested to see what CDPR could cook up as an original IP. For the talent evident in all of their titles, I'd love to see something totally, brand-spankin' new.
1. Cyberpunk DLCs
2. Cyberpunk 2
...
4. Punkt : The Cyberpunk Card Game
5. The Witcher 4: Ciri Adventures
2. Cyberpunk 2
...
4. Punkt : The Cyberpunk Card Game
5. The Witcher 4: Ciri Adventures
So would I.
They've managed to build upon the work of others, so it would be intriguing to see if that's what they actually need (a solid ground work from someone else) to be good, or could they cook up something as well done from the ground up themselves.
Truly, I think building on existing IPs is probably more difficult. Not that the creative process is any easier or harder, but when I take an existing work, that automatically means that the existing audience looks at it with their own, established pre-conceptions based on what is already released (novels, films, comic books...hell...even history). I think it's really, really difficult to adapt an existing medium to a new medium in a way that will appeal to existing fans as much as the original piece. (Which is why I'm excited for CP2077. I mean, when the creator himself says that the studio managed to change his own mind about the way he had always envisioned his own world...that's pretty exciting.)
Conversely, while the initial heavy lifting may be more challenging to put together a unique universe and gameplay approach for a brand new IP, I think it has a better chance of creating widespread appeal. No one has any idea what to expect, and can love it for exactly what it is without existing notions that create static.
I wish after Cyberpunk 2077 CD to make a d&d game. They have better resources, the manpower, better tech than compared to Larian Studios. I think they could make a pretty good game. I don't know what the settings of the game should be but here is one idea that I came up with right now. It takes place in the Underdark and the player can choose only the Underdark races. Also, I should add some surface areas as well to mix it up. The game I think should be third-person also. Imagine if the game is first-person. That would probably would be not a good idea to begin.
Well, that wouldn't happen anytime soon since we already know CD is going to make Witcher 4 after this. The Witcher Universe has lots of lore from which CD can choose from.
Well, that wouldn't happen anytime soon since we already know CD is going to make Witcher 4 after this. The Witcher Universe has lots of lore from which CD can choose from.
I'm not so sure about that. There is - sometimes even extensive - groundword to be done if you just happen to pick a setting out of the blue. Like, if I was to suddenly write a game for Forgotten Realms. It'd be an ordeal because I know next to nothing about it, nor am I really interested in it in the first place. As opposed to if I were to write a game for Fallout, of which I do know a little bit about on how to keep things fairly consistent with the first game.
But even so, I would not need to know "everything" there is about FR, I'd just need to read the bits that'd be relevant to what I have in mind and adapt my "vision" to that.
Now, I could churn out the trappings for a "setting" of sorts in about an hour. But how good or interesting or original it would be, is a completely another question, as would be fleshing the setting out with a history and characters. And keeping that kind of thing wholly consistent and intriguing is the sort of ordeal you do not have when you adapt your story to a ready-made world.
With Cyberpunk, CDPR is taking a pre-existing "history" of a setting, and in order to not needing to "copy" it, they jump 57 years ahead in time, and thus they don't really need to worry about the original context too much, just that adapt their vision of Cyberpunk somewhat loosely to what was established in 2020 and mine the details from there. They have a lot of stuff that already exists that they can simply pick up and reference to in order to keep the familiarity. Kinda like how Bethesda did with Fallout (take the setting, advance time with a hard hand so you don't need to really consider the source material by other means than a list of names thrown for the sake of brand recognition for old-tyme fans... although, in Bethesda's case they completely missed the point of their source material, which I don't think CDPR did with CP, but nonetheless).
Now, Mike approves of it, and I'm not saying all that means it's going to be bad, but think about it if they were to create all that from scratch. Would the setting be as rich, detailed and intriguing as it is with how Mike and others made it through the years? I don't believe it would, because coming up with something original and interesting at the same time these days is hard as hell.
I think this is a fair point for IPs that were meant to be built upon and expanded. (After all, RPGs or other gaming universes were created with exactly that in mind!) What I'm referring to is adapting a book into a film...or a game...or vice versa.
The concept there is that the universe existed originally in a, shall we say, "refined form". People loved the experience of that universe in that form. So if I take that novel, and I go to make a film out of it, much of what inherently made it such a great novel will need to change. Films are not novels. It's those foundational changes to the experience that create the challenge, automatically introducing some level of disconnect among the existing fan base. (Hence, for example, why so many video games based on movie licenses are just terrible.)
Point in case, I was outright addicted to Lord of the Rings growing up. I was beyond excited for the films...but when I saw them, I was very much disappointed. The energy felt all wrong. The dialogue felt rushed. The depth of the books was just missing in so many places. Tolkien's creeping, brooding horror was replaced with jump-scares and action scenes... I didn't like it. I thought the visualization was excellent. I even recognized that it was a good film. But because it was "Lord of the Rings", I felt it came nowhere close to what the novels had achieved, and it took me a while to truly appreciate the films for what they were. For me, Lord of the Rings is a novel...not a film.
Conversely, pretty much everyone I've ever met that watched the movies before reading the books absolutely loved them. A divided audience.
Equal consideration: The Usual Suspects. A film made to be a film, and a story told with powerful visualization upon its inception. I would challenge someone to adapt it into a novel...or a video game...in a way that would carry the same appeal to the existing audience. (Most likely, both would fall horribly flat. [I probably wouldn't even play the game. Cringe.]) Hence, the more refined and established something is in its original medium, the harder it becomes to re-imagine it successfully in a different medium.
I can understand that, and I feel that such is exactly what many studios might do. However, I feel that CDPR advances from 2020 to 2077 for wholly valid reasons:
- As stated, we're shifting mediums. CRPGs are not PnP RPGs. While a direct adaptation of the mechanics on a 1:1 scale would have been technically possible, it would also intentionally set aside some of the most defining aspects of the video game medium. Namely, the ability to create virtual, moving worlds that the player can experience in real-time. By re-branding the concpet of Cyberpunk under a new "version", it sends a clear message to players that this will not be exactly what they've experienced in the past.
- It allows for them to try to qualify adjustments to things like gameplay mechanics and plot devices (especially with characters and lore). If I let a good 60 years pass, I can go ahead and fine-tune the gameworld to tell exactly the story I'm trying to tell without parts feeling rushed, forced, or ret-conned.
- It creates a buffer for suspension of disbelief. Much of the appeal of CP2020 was that it was set in the near future, not far future. So audiences could better anchor their experience in a familiar, more realistic world, rather than have to imagine a completely fictional existence from scratch. But, "2020" was chosen because the PnP game was orginally made in the 1980s. Well...now...it's actually 2020. To achieve that same suspension of disbelief, we kind of need to enact the same process again, but basing it on the world today instead of the world as it was in 1980. A simple, but very powerful consideration, I think.
- It's ownership of the project (for better or for worse). Regardless of whether audiences love it, hate it, or find themselves somewhere in the middle, the distinction between CP2077 and CP2020 will be clear.
I watched a youtube video the other day and they mentioned not Witcher 4 but a game set in the Witcher world, The Continent, also their team already made a concept of a new single player witcher game but not with Geralt as protagonist. Dunno if there's a newer update/news but that's the last thing I heard.
This is way too far into the future. Maybe, I HOPE, PLEASE, Disney cancels Star Wars rights of Electronic effing Arts and CDPR gets the deal. Can you imagine? Hoo boy. I wish.
Pretty sure it was confirmed that they are working on Witcher 4 as the next installment. They managed to lengthen the deal where they can use Witcher source material and the next Witcher wont be based around Gerralt but instead you will be making your own Witcher presumably similar to how in CP you will make your own V rather than have a pre-defined character with set looks and a personality.
Sorry if this was mentioned already
Sorry if this was mentioned already
In the Witcher game we will be able to make our own character? Where did you hear that?
I don't think most people knew about that info if what your saying is real.
I think I actually wouldn't mind playing a Witcher game with my own created Witcher...